home

More Missteps in Iraq

by TChris

Other than a troop withdrawal, the one thing that might increase support for the U.S. in Iraq is a serious commitment to reconstruction. The Washington Post tells us that half the money already spent has been "eaten away by the insurgency, a buildup of Iraq's criminal justice system and the investigation and trial of Saddam Hussein." Although only 20 percent of the funds already authorized for reconstruction remain unallocated, the Bush administration has announced that it won't seek further funding from Congress, despite "what authorities say is tens of billions of dollars of work yet to be done merely to bring reliable electricity, water and other services to Iraq's 26 million people." Perhaps this is the administration's answer to critics who complain of its willingness to rebuild Iraq while largely ignoring the need to rebuild New Orleans.

No matter what money the administration spends in Iraq, it can't overcome the damage it causes by its continuing use of violence against the innocent:

A U.S. air strike that Americans said was directed at suspected bombers killed a family of 12 in their home north of Baghdad Monday night, Iraqi officials said Tuesday. A Washington Post special correspondent watched as rescuers removed the bodies of women and children still in their nightclothes.

Maj. Abdul Jabbar Kaissi, a security officer with Salahuddin governorate, said the air strike killed the 12-member family of Ghadban Nahi Kaissi, a farmer and relative of the governor of Salahuddin province, Ahmad Mahmud Kaissi. U.S. forces surrounded the area Tuesday morning as bulldozers removed rubble and emergency crews pulled out bodies. The Post special correspondent watched as crews removed the bloody body of an older woman, her head covered in a black scarf, and two younger women in nightclothes with their heads uncovered for sleep.

Rescuers brought out the bodies of three boys on their thin mattresses. They were wrapped in the blankets in which search teams said the boys had been sleeping when the explosives hit. The boys appeared younger than 10.

Residents and Iraqi officials said there were no insurgents in the home.

< Bush Missed His Thespian Calling | Abramoff Pleads Guilty in Washington >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#1)
    by Kevin Hayden on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 09:23:58 AM EST
    Twelve more indictments for the war crimes trial of Herr George, I should think. Maybe if he tapped the phones of more Iraqis than Quakers, he could do better identifying the bad guys from friendlies.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 09:51:49 AM EST
    Of COURSE the residents and Iraqi officials said no insurgents were in the home. But we know the word of these people can't be trusted. And even so, it's war, sh*t happens, what about the AMERICANS the terrorists blew up on 9/11??? There, normally deranged wingers are now relieved of posting on this one. For the rest of us, how to even comprehend that this occurs on a daily basis in some form or another. We will never stop paying for our ignorance of what is done abroad (and at home) in our names UNTIL we choose to be ignorant no longer. Or enough of us to change it. Look at your own child and try to imagine. And then imagine no one will ever be held to account. Imagine. Are we able to do that anymore on the national level?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#3)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:05:59 AM EST
    Wolfowitz 27Mar03:
    “There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”
    Who could have foreseen _______ (insert appropriate disaster).

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:09:22 AM EST
    Funny, the story didn't proclaim the fate of the three bombers, nor discuss why or how the bombers became such priority targets as to neccessitate a response with laser guided ordinance. My guess is that in order to become a target of such great importance that the military would spend the thousands necessary to use this type of ordinance, and risk civilian casualties and the ensuing media hack job that inevitable follows, that these particular bombers must have been some really bad actors. Since the WP doesn't see fit to inform us about the bombers ends, I will just assume that it was just one more of the already thousands of successful military missions in Iraq that are bringing safety and security to our troops and yet going completely unreported.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#5)
    by soccerdad on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:16:56 AM EST
    I will just assume that it was just one more of the already thousands of successful military missions in Iraq that are bringing safety and security to our troops and yet going completely unreported
    sort of like taking out that the wedding party last year? Since day 1, the US has used shock and awe combined with a clear indifference to civilian casualties in an attempt to beat the Iraqis into submission. This philosophy was articulated by Rumsfled who said "eventually the Iraqis will get tired of being killed". The use of cluster munitions, napalm, and depleted uranium in civilian areas has been well documented. Now they are just trying to get the Sunnis. If the Shias produce a theocratic state friendly to Iran which could pose a threat to Saudi Arabia will the US turn around and supply arms to the Sunnis?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:26:45 AM EST
    Variable, What. On. Earth. Are. You. Drinking? Creating more angry victims of senseless violence is going to keep you safe? I can't even begin to comprehend how "freedom" creates that kind of inhumane and (purposefully?)illogical thinking. Perhaps it's another example of shoddy intelligence colliding with a rank disregard for innocent human life on the part of those who are supposed to have a GREATER regard for it. The bombers? Evidently, genius, they WERE NOT THERE. Or does the U.S. military like to downplay it's killing of "the enemy"? Use your head. The bombers got away, were never there, are still free, take your pick...and an innocent family is butchered by American bombs. I can't take you seriously here. I bit on the troll bait. That's all I can figure.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 10:38:12 AM EST
    an innocent family is butchered by American bombs. Dadler, They were not real human beings, like fathers, mothers , children etc. Not at all... they were "just" collateral damage... Weren't they?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 11:11:18 AM EST
    Dadler, similarly to the way you choose to believe that the bombers never existed (in order to maintain your position), I believe that they just couldn't find a big enough piece of them to identify it as human (it helps me sleep at night). Regardless of the position we take, my primary point was that if the WP was credibly attempting to report the facts neither you, nor I, would be guessing at what happened to the bombers. Furthermore, I was also attempting to unmask your complete disregard for the bombers and also your complete disregard for the US soldiers who they are attempting to kill. A point, which, I think your response quite accurately highlights.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#9)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 11:19:04 AM EST
    A U.S. air strike that Americans said was directed at suspected bombers killed a family of 12 in their home north of Baghdad Monday night, Iraqi officials said Tuesday. A Washington Post special correspondent watched as rescuers removed the bodies of women and children still in their nightclothes. This is our NY's resolution? Less troops, More bombs. So we can expect more of this? These are Class I war crimes.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#10)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 11:29:42 AM EST
    Che? Thanks for the link... I think. The trolls keep telling us that "It's a war. Sh*t happens". They're right... Sh*t happens... That's a good enough reason to call them "trolls".

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#11)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 11:48:22 AM EST
    Variable, It's more honorable to disregard the bombers to protect the innocent. You disregard the innocent first in your bloodlust to get the crooks. That is not liberation. It only makes more bombers. Your ends do not even come close to being a sane justification of the means.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#12)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 11:54:18 AM EST
    Variable, There were no bombers there. Or do you think the military would withold that information at this point? I have the same regard for the soldiers that I HAVE FOR MY OWN BROTHER, WHO IS ONE OF THE SOLDIERS, FORMERLY IN IRAQ, NOW ROAMING THE MOUNTAINS OF AFGHANISTAN!!! So my regard is informed by having a family member in the conflict, a family member free enough to handle opposing views. His opinion of my regard for soldiers is much more important than yours. And thanks for failing to address how these senseless killing of innocent civilians make you safer? How does creating more angry victims do that? Rationalize it, please. Since these wildly stupid civilian killings also put US soldiers in greater danger, I'm interested how your opinion translates into regard for those same soldiers. Iraqis are the main victims of terrorist bombings AND the military, ask them which way they'd rather die. Do you the the WP is purposefully witholding information about the bombers? Do you think they should mistrust the word of residents AND government officials? Should they ONLY believe the US military? And, please, to repeat, explain to me how senseless acts of violence (on the chance that MAYBE some terrorist will be there) are going to make you safer? I want to know how creating more angry victims of OUR violence is going to make US safer in this context?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#13)
    by Punchy on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 12:21:33 PM EST
    Talk about a zero-sum game. Jesus...the military attempts to take out some bombers, misses (badly), and has now probably inspired a dozen more bombers. Repeat, cycle, repeat. Wow...an entire family. It's just sick.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#14)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 12:31:09 PM EST
    the military attempts to take out some bombers, misses (badly), and has now probably inspired a dozen more bombers... A dozen more bombers... who will fight back against the US with whatever means are available to them... including becoming suicide "car bombers". And no, they will not be being "terrorists" in any sense of the word, if they react this way, no matter how they are portrayed. It will the very people BushCo thought would throw flowers - fighting to kick the US out of Iraq. --- Dadler:
    how these senseless killing of innocent civilians make you safer? How does creating more angry victims do that?
    How, indeed?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 01:48:53 PM EST
    Oppps. Let me try that again. Dadler, Just two quick side bar notes before I get started on the meat and potatoes of your response. You should always read the permalink on these threads, and read them critically, atleast that is if you want to know what your talking about. Secondly, you forgot to tell me that you do support the troops, just not the mission. Alrighty then on to your response....
    There were no bombers there. Or do you think the military would withold that information at this point?
    There were 3 bombers there, the story clearly states that soldiers tracked them into the building that was hit and then called in air support and hit the building with laser guided ordinance. You see, laser guided ordinance requires personnel on the ground with a type of laser gun that paints the target in laser light that the ordinance then targets itself on. Mistakes can happen, but the story makes no indication that a mistake was made. That indicates to me, that the building was destroyed with the bombers inside and beyond the target of the building other nearby buildings were damaged with civilians inside. No, I don’t think the military would withhold this info, in fact , I think they would definitely offer it up to the WP in an attempt to offset the inevitable hack job that we all know is coming, if it were verifiable. I definitely think the WP would withhold the info about the bombers, because it gives there left leaning story about innocent civilians dying more impact. In other words, 12 dead civilians is much better than 12 dead civilians and 3 dead terrorists, at least, as far as the left is concerned.
    And thanks for failing to address how these senseless killing of innocent civilians make you safer? How does creating more angry victims do that?
    It doesn’t and I never said it does, However, maybe you could ask your brother to explain how killing three guys who plant IED’s makes him safer.
    Rationalize it, please. Since these wildly stupid civilian killings also put US soldiers in greater danger, I'm interested how your opinion translates into regard for those same soldiers. Iraqis are the main victims of terrorist bombings AND the military, ask them which way they'd rather die
    .
    Personally I rationalize it like this: First of all it isn’t so wildly stupid when you realize they probably killed three terrorists whose job it was to plant IED’s to take out US military personnel. Secondly, I see a very grey area here, but I will speculate anyway. It is possible that these people were in such close proximity to the terrorists because they were involved with the terrorists. It is also possible that the “innocent” victims were not involved with the but turned a blind eye to their goings on. And lastly it is possible that they were purely innocent victims who had no idea what was going on. I don’t know which is true, but I do know that my next statement is completely true. If Iraqi’s had policed their own country clean of the terrorists, or if Muslim’s had policed their ME region clean of these scum bags, there would be no need for us to do it, and hence we wouldn’t be there. Not only that, but if Muslims and Iraqi’s were doing the policing we wouldn’t be seeing 12 dead civilians from a smart bomb, we would be seeing thousands dead from being hacked to death with machete’s. Plain and simple, we are we most technologically advanced and discriminate fighting force the world has ever known…….if that’s not good enough for you come up with a realistic alternative or shut up.
    Do you the the WP is purposefully witholding information about the bombers? Do you think they should mistrust the word of residents AND government officials? Should they ONLY believe the US military?
    No, what I do believe is the WP knows just like the military knows that the bombers are where they should be at the bottom of a pile of rubble dead as dead gets. I also know that that is a great thing that the WP will never go out of its way to report.
    And, please, to repeat, explain to me how senseless acts of violence (on the chance that MAYBE some terrorist will be there) are going to make you safer? I want to know how creating more angry victims of OUR violence is going to make US safer in this context?
    Again it was not a senseless act of violence, it was a calculated and meticulously carried out deployment of a smart bomb to remove 3 IED terrorists. A drone tracked three terrorists, alerted the military personnel who then tracked these individuals to a building and destroyed it. The bomb didn’t miss, the terrorists are dead, our military carried out its plan perfectly and impressively. Yes, it is very unfortunate that nearby civilians died in the process but yes it is war and sh*t does happen. Lastly, I dispute your theory that killing terrorists or attempting to kill terrorists creates more angry terrorists. I challenge you to prove that theory. Before you get all excited, your inadequate view of things does not constitute proof, and neither does bullsh*t OpEd pieces from the NYTs. I being someone who has been in combat in Desert Storm, can tell you with out question that the biggest impression that the awesome power of the US military in action leaves you with is complete fear. Having said that, I believe that if you watch your brother, whose a terrorist, get blown to bits by a smart bomb, it will have at least as much influence in convincing you to look for a new line of work as it would pissing you off enough to do what he was attempting, if not more influence. You see, your are buying into the terrorists sales pitch that we are creating more terrorists than we killing. I don’t believe it to be so. Lets face it, courage is something in short supply in the world in general. If you don’t believe me look back to Desert Storm when the Republic Guard was surrendering to news reporters. I would say that when you are faced with a bullet or changing your ways, a good 80% of us cowardly humans will change our ways.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 02:23:29 PM EST
    Dadler.... and an innocent family is butchered by American bombs. First of all, you have no way of knowing if they are "innocent"...But, I'm sure in order to keep up the tirade against American soldiers, you'll continue to perceive them that way regardless. Secondly.... I seem to recall a story a few days ago about a whole family being "butchered" when insurgents broke into their house and slit all their throats.... Funny, but I don't remember hearing any outcry from any of you on the left about that?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 02:49:34 PM EST
    BB: you have no way of knowing if they are "innocent"... No?
    bloody body of an older woman, her head covered in a black scarf, and two younger women in nightclothes with their heads uncovered for sleep. Rescuers brought out the bodies of three boys on their thin mattresses. They were wrapped in the blankets in which search teams said the boys had been sleeping when the explosives hit. The boys appeared younger than 10
    Scary "terrorists", BB?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 02:52:46 PM EST
    It doesn't matter how accurate aerial bombing in civilian areas is, it is still impermissable and reprehensible. It has always been indefensible, but unfortunately it has become normatively acceptable behavior since the victors in recent wars have so often used this vicious tool. These women killed by these bombs are what we now euphamistically call 'collateral damage'. In fact, there is nothing 'collateral' to their deaths at all. Their deaths are in no way incidental or collateral to our military objectives. Their deaths are really the entire point of our occupation of Iraq. At least that is how the Iraqis will view it, and theirs is the view that really matters. If we become so focused on force protection in Iraq that we rely ever more on marginal intel and aerial bombing to achieve our military objectives, the number of the 'collateral' dead will rise exponentially. That will result in further inflaming Anti-American sentiment and the political radicalization of ever greater numbers of Iraqis. If we are going to operate in Iraq without alienating the broader population, we can't drop bombs on civilain areas with impunity. We have to put boots on the ground and take down the bad guys the old fashioned way. If we don't want to accept the cost that entails, we ought to get the heck out now.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#19)
    by Punchy on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 02:53:23 PM EST
    "First of all, you have no way of knowing if they are "innocent" Uh...yeah..those pre-pubescent boys and girls are not innocent? What are they guilty of, sleeping in the wrong house? Gimmie a break. Maybe the military will release the info they used to pick that house so we can all see if they're innocent. Yeah, that'll happen.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 03:31:04 PM EST
    Variable, in case you don't remember from last year, you are limited to four comments a day here. Thank you.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 03:52:52 PM EST
    Aside from the asides about the most recent atrocity(ies); the larger point is that bush has given up on iraq. More $$ for invasion, no money for rebuilding. Just another way that bush has lied about our purpose in iraq. Spread 'peace and democracy'!? Gee, destroy the country and then refuse to rebuild it. bush=war criminal.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 03:57:21 PM EST
    BB, Terrorists who slit throats are awful. Is that arguable? Of course not. Is the conduct of the CIVILIAN-CONTROLLED military of my nation arguable? Of course IT IS. There is no dearth of these types of "collateral damage" stories. They are murder stories, the kind that create angry new victims looking for retribution. Sure, that makes us safer.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:24:00 PM EST
    Variable, You didn't kill three bombers, you killed a family. This isn't Desert Storm, it's a guerilla war that is nothing like it. Your experts in the military were IGNORED by this administration, in their wet dream rush to violence. They did more to disparage and abuse the troops than any loyal American dissenting (actually practicing freedom) here at home. Violence begets violence is the point. The number of "insurgents" has been rising. Proof of a failed policy, if nothing else. If the insurgency weren't getting worse, more cagey, etc., we wouldn't be here discussing this. No, I can't prove every innocent victim of violence has a family member who will be out for retribution, but I can say that vengeance is one of the more base and universal human desires. Can you think of a "better" way to make someone want revenge than killing an innocent family? I can't. Shock and awe was fine for the open-space rout that was desert storm. It doesn't mean squat in an urban guerilla war in a nation of 25 million people, most of whom don't want us there at all. Peace.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:27:31 PM EST
    Thank you for the reminder, Jeralyn, I almost forgot that I was able to post one more time today. It seemed for a while, that I was afforded much more latitude lately, but alas, I made the error of Dadler's ways too plain to see and now I'm on Sh*t happens list again. Michael Bryan, I thought that was a very good post, well thought out and at least it seemed honest and sincere. I could not disagree with any part of it. I wonder, however, if you understand the relationship between the recent unacceptability of the "boots on the ground" tactic that you speak of, and the ongoing leftist media blitz that makes it seem as though each soldier that has died, did so atleast a hundred times over and that each of his hundred deaths were all for nothing? I wonder if you realize that the extreme force protection measures that we are seeing is because of political motivation from the civilian leaders who know that every anti war activist in the world is going to slant and advertise every single military death. I wonder if you realize that the US military is perfectly capable of and would be completely in favor of a successful "boots on the ground campaign", however cannot do so because of the reality of the political climate that the left leaning media in this country goes about manufacturing each and every day? I wonder, Michael, had you given any of this consideration?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#25)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:33:09 PM EST
    Variable, One of my favorites from your tragic comedy: I would say that when you are faced with a bullet or changing your ways, a good 80% of us cowardly humans will change our ways. Well, if invaders ever hit our shores I sure as hell don't want YOU next to me on the street defending the ole' USA. Dude, that is so un american. Of course, I'm sure you only meant that to apply to the more cowardly Iraqis, right my friend? Sure. Here's another gem: Not only that, but if Muslims and Iraqi’s were doing the policing we wouldn’t be seeing 12 dead civilians from a smart bomb, we would be seeing thousands dead from being hacked to death with machete’s. You realize, of course, that this is the president's stated goal. Your outright contempt for the muslim world is inherently racist. Your level of comprehension of the wars in Iraq, including the decade of sanctions, and their impact on the Iraqi civilian population is both politically naive, and savagely indifferent.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 04:58:35 PM EST
    Oh, sorry Jeralyn, I just cant let that one go. Lets hope that your already in bed tonight and won't see this til tommorrow. Actually Dadler, yes, I can think of a better way of creating terrorists. Lets start with creating a brutal and oppressive regime that is in complete and total control of each and every facet of our would be terrorists life. Then lets add in that this regime is stealing all the nations wealth and leaving none for any but the people who are aiding the regimes efforts. Then lets throw in some religious zealotry and some racial bigotry. Not done yet. Lets throw in many irresponsible religious leaders who issue fatwa's stating that all of the previous ingredients in the pot are there because of evil white westerners. Then just a pinch of a few virgins waiting in heaven for would be terrorist. Throw in complete and utter poverty and total lack of education, because the people pointing the finger at you and me are busy building new palaces and buying guns with the nations resources. Now that you have all that in the pot the only remaining ingredient is a dictator like Saddam standing over the pot stirring it to a boil, and lo and behold, you got terrorists everywhere. I know you like to think, Dadler, that we created these terrorists, but the fact is that the basic facts of life in the ME has created them, and it did so long before we got there. The only remaining question is should we start dismantling the terror machine now, or should we continue to allow other dictators like Saddam another 10, 20, or 30 years to stir the pot first.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#27)
    by soccerdad on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 05:20:19 PM EST
    Variable that is the biggest pile of self-serving nonsense I have read in a long time. Since you seem to be completely ignorant I suggest you google the army war college and go read all their material on insurgenices and asymetric warfare. Because you clearly don't know much or are simply being argumentative in which case dont bother reading. Also read the material that Cordsman has but out at CSIS. God what nonsense.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#28)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 07:10:45 PM EST
    Variable? I'm really curious. Where did you learn all this? How come no one else knows this stuff? I mean, this is important... the world needs to know.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 03, 2006 at 08:44:02 PM EST
    Variable, Your last post had led me to believe you don't know the actual history of U.S. involvement with radical Islam. For example, we propped up Saddaam (who was anti-radical Islam) while training radical Islamic fighters in Afghanistan to fight the USSR, which was closer in ruling style to Saddaam. Guess what a lot of those fighters are doing today? Attacking the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq (oh, and that little 9/11 thing, too). As for further back, check out "Cold Warrior, Holy Roller" by Robert Dreyfuss in the December/January 2006 issue of MOTHER JONES Magazine, which the following excerpt is from: The United States and its partners in nations like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan didn’t create radical political Islam, whose theological forebears in the Middle East can be traced back to the eighth century. But consider, for a moment, an analogy with a movement closer to home. In America, Christian fundamentalism dates back at least to the 1840s, and right-wing evangelicals were an inchoate force throughout the 20th century. Yet until the emergence of the Moral Majority, the Christian Coalition, and such leaders as Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, and Pat Robertson in the late 1970s, the religious right had no true political leaders and very little real-world impact. Similarly, the Islamic right did not arise as a true political movement until [...] by tolerating, and in some cases aiding, the development of these early activists, the United States helped give radical Islamism the structure and leadership that turned it into a global political hurricane.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 06:21:19 AM EST
    First of all, you have no way of knowing if they are "innocent"...
    And you have no way of knowing they are "guilty".
    Funny, but I don't remember hearing any outcry from any of you on the left about that?
    Is it really necessary to say cutting people's throats is bad? At least I can take heart that I didn't help pay for that senseless bloodshed...but we all helped paid for the bomb dropped on that family. We are accomplices.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 07:48:36 AM EST
    Edgar... Rescuers brought out the bodies of three boys on their thin mattresses. And this just in..."12 miners found alive"... Opps... it looks like that was some bad info.. Get my point now Edgar! The press is not always right or accurate. But you go ahead...you believe everything they tell you.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 08:13:34 AM EST
    "What gives rise to a terrorist? What gives rise to a young man or a woman to give up her or his life? It is the political disputes, and we need to resolve them, and also the issue of illiteracy and poverty. And this combined are breeding grounds of extremism and terrorism."
    Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, 12/6/2004, in interview with Michael Drudge
    "Definitely there are other reasons for this ferment that we see in the Arab and the Muslim world from Central Asia to Pakistan to Sudan-- things that are not related in one way shape or form to the Arab-Israeli conflict or to the West, but related to the failure of the existing regimes of these countries in terms of delivering the basics to their own people in terms of basic human rights, basic civil rights, basic economic development, good education, and a promise of a better future. There is a tremendous failure in this area and I think you hear voices--intellectuals, academicians, journalists and some religious people telling their particular regimes that you are responsible in part, at least, for this sad state of affairs."
    Hisham Melhem, Washington correspondent for the Lebanese newspaper, A-Safir, October 29, 2001 Interview with Carol Castiel
    So we need to start addressing the root causes for this sort of anger towards the West. And that unfortunately comes back to those age-old problems of opportunity, development, and basic living standards for people.
    David Wright-Neville is the senior research fellow at the center for Global Terrorism at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, in interview with Rebecca Ward on 10/17/02. I could go on providing these quotes from people that actually know a hell of a lot more than you and I do, Soccerdad, however since I am limited to four posts a day, this will have to suffice. I understand that there is very little agreement between the left and right on what terrorism is and how it should be dealt with. I can live with that, and I can also live with your contention that I am making this self serving crap up. In the long run, I guess the only way to put a debate like this to rest is by having the majority of Americans agreeing with you. We both know how the 04 election turned out, and now the public has watched a hawk in action and will have every opportunity to reject his policies and vote in a liberal in 08. But I think deep down, we both know how thats ones gonna turn out too.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#33)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 08:29:46 AM EST
    It is the political disputes, and we need to resolve them, ....
    This is the key point that was not in your original post.
    Definitely there are other reasons for this ferment that we see in the Arab and the Muslim world from Central Asia to Pakistan to Sudan-- things that are not related in one way shape or form to the Arab-Israeli conflict or to the West,
    This means that there additional reasons, your orignial post concentrated on these additional reasons and not all the reasons. You cannot have a meaningful plan of dealing with terrorism in the ME without discussing all the reasons and that includes the West interfering for about 100 years in the region and their governments. There been a lot of good material published by the War College on how to deal with terrorism, its too bad neither Bush nor Kerry read it and/or believe the military experts. For a plan to have any chance of working it must have economic, social, and political components in addition to any military component and must be done with a clear understanding of the culture. Now if your goal is occupation, just bomb away without any concern for winning hearts and minds.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#34)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 08:36:28 AM EST
    One last comment, I think that the Democratic leadership, Biden, Clinton, the DLC, etc, are pretty much on board with Bush. In fact there is a good deal of evidence which suggests that Clinton also knew that Iraq did not have WMDs. His whole offensive, called Desert Fox I think, was in essence Bush lite. Knowing that they no longer had WMDs this was his way of making sure that sanctions were not lifted. Of course the funny part now is that the Repubs at the time accused him of "wagging the dog" Clinton did not want sanctions lifted because Saddam had already signed contracts with Russia and another country to rehab the oil fields and also was planning on changing to using Euros instead of Dollars for oil sales. Saddam would probably sold his oil to anyone but the US.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#35)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 09:03:41 AM EST
    Variable, If you noticed, the first line of my quote was "The United States and its partners in nations like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan didn’t create radical political Islam, whose theological forebears in the Middle East can be traced back to the eighth century". I would hope you comprehend that means that I don't think WE were responsible for EVERYTHING. But, I ask you, who supported those awful regimes so long, who kept them propped up with weapons and power for so long, because we wanted cheap oil? I don't understand how you cannot bear to look at your own nation's role in this history. Do you think our sh*t doesn't smell? Do you think only others should be held responsible for things we played a major role in? These regimes were horrible, no sh*t Sherlock. That's an INARGUABLE point and not the point. The point is our complicity with those regimes and how it has lead us to this point. What are you afriad of? Actually admitting you live in a free country that is courageous enough to criticize itself in a vital manner? And, BTW, when did I say you MADE ANYTHING UP??? I am disagreeing with your logic, your understanding of history. But don't make up some accusation because it makes you feel more comoftable. I've been nothing but intellectually up front with you. So save your empty charges, please.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 09:14:31 AM EST
    That was actually a very good post, Soccerdad, and amazingly enough, I agreed with all of it, with the exception of the last statement. You should have quit while you were ahead.
    Now if your goal is occupation, just bomb away without any concern for winning hearts and minds.
    If you believe that this is what the Americans, the US military, or the Bush administration has attempted to or has done, I am sorry, but it is you who has some reading to do. If you don't realize that this military effort in Iraq has been the most surgical military effort ever waged in the history of human beings, then definately it is you who needs some education. Now if you are saying that more could be done to keep this conflict from overflowing into the lives of the civilians in Iraq, I would agree completely. However, I don't think its the administration that needs to offer its hand out to the liberals to bring the unity required to bring this conflict to a successful and expedient end. I feel that the extreme anti war left has way to much control over the democratic party these days and offering a hand of cooperation would only result in a one armed executive branch. Clear evidence of this is the democrats tactics over the eavesdropping issue. Clearly constitutional protections must be preserved, but the leadership of the democratic party is not pushing for a compromise that allows the executive the powers he needs to execute the war while also preserving constitutional protections, the are pushing for impeachment, embarrasment, and political execution. Dadler, I will give you all the room you require to make the argument of our horrendous history in this region. I'll even admit that in the past it was all about cheap oil. I'll even admit that GW is perfectly aware of all of this history, if not partially responsible for it. But tell me how that lessens our need to win this war against people are no longer talking about killing us and actually doing it?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#37)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 09:38:10 AM EST
    Variable, The citizens of Iraq didn't attack us. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. The hijackers were almost entirely SAUDI. And we have been coddling the Saudi dictators LONGER than we coddled Hussein, and LONGER than we armed and trained radical Islamic killers. Perhaps a "war" of some sort would've been inevitable, but rushing headlong into mindless violence behind a pack of lies and paranoia on the part of the supposedly Free American Government is a recipe for disaster, which is what we have. Here's what I would've proposed: a massive humanitarian effort ALL OVER THE GLOBE, a years long concerted effort to PROVE we will no longer USE other people for our own political purposes -- as we are now doing in Iraq, and the Iraqis know it. I would've put on the robes of a humble giant who REFUSES to be drawn into the kind of violence we are committing ourselves to have nothing to do with anymore. We would've set a completely new and comprehensive example of humanity for the entire globe to see, and done so TO HONOR THE 3000 killed on 9/11. If we were attacked in the process of doing so, there would be ZERO OPPORTUNITY FOR TERRORISTS TO CLAIM ANYTHING WITH ANYONE. We had to play another game, not the terrorists' game. We had CREATE a new game, of our making and choosing. We needed to IMAGINE, and we failed miserably, believing this type of unoriginal violence would prevail, which it won't. It can't. Or else the terrorists are right to think THEIR violence might make a difference. And we both know they're not. So why do we think we are? And if that made the terrorists look right, like we really were this evil nation that is now trying to make up for it, so f'ing what? We're not in it for the shortrun, right? Then what does it matter what it LOOKS like at first, the result would be a changed world for the better, led by a humble nation in the process of evolving in honor of murdered citizens. To put it this way, if we can't win the rhetorical debate with radical Islam -- and we're not winning it now in the region we need to -- then what good is all this freedom we've had? And what does it show the world freedom can produce? It is not showing a fraction of what it can, and that is on us as free Americans.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#38)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:46:15 AM EST
    Dadler:
    a massive humanitarian effort ALL OVER THE GLOBE, a years long concerted effort to PROVE we will no longer USE other people for our own political purposes We would've set a completely new and comprehensive example of humanity for the entire globe to see, and done so TO HONOR THE 3000 killed on 9/11.
    Well outlined. Thank you for putting clear wording to what I, and I think many others, feel are some of the basic fundaments of the kind of change in conciousness and attitude needed to address the root causes of terrorism, as well as to how current political and economic manipulations contribute as components or aspects of those causes. I think what is being done Iraq and aroung the world now in the name of a "war on terror" is only addressing symptoms rather than the disease, as well as being simply more of the same actions that caused the disease in the first place. As with physical disease, treating symptoms not only can never eradicate but only mask the underlying illness, and is an abdication of responsibility that only allows the illness to fester and grow.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#39)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:55:30 AM EST
    Variable don't agree I have tried to read everything I can. The raid on Fallujah, the use of cluster munitions, napalm, white phospherous, large bombs in civilian neighborhoods, AG prison and other torture spots, the use of collective punishment, the lack of reconstruction, and use of "sweeps" , and a concerted effort to postpone elections all indicate a policy of occupation not liberation.
    I feel that the extreme anti war left has way to much control over the democratic party
    Pure propaganda. In fact the leadership of the Democratic party is in the control of centerists such as Biden, Clinton, the DLC etc. As soon as Dean says something anti-war he gets slapped down. You then go on to conflate the spying issue with the tactics of executing the war, for the sole purpose of crtisizing the Dems. Doesn't hold up.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:23:05 AM EST
    I hope, Dadler, that we can agree that there are two major undertakings that must happen in order to resolve the Jihadist/Western conflict. The first immediate crisis that we are faced with is the terrorists networks that are totally focused on the destruction of Western civilization. It is my opinion that these groups will not change their aims and goals no matter how we deal with them. It is also my belief that the only way to deal with them is to isolate and destroy them, atleast to a point where they accept their destruction as inevitable, and possibly beyond if necessary. That is to say we must decimate the orginizations and networks and then and only then allow insignificant individuals the opportunity to turn away from lives of jihad, but if they refuse, destroy them as well. Now this brings me to the second undertaking. Winning the hearts and minds of the masses of ME people who do not believe that Western civilization must be destroyed. Obviously, the two are very interconnected. Possibly, to a point where both cannot happen. I do not claim to know enough about ME culture to make that call. But I trust that GW has given the situtation it's due consideration, and believes that it is possible. Otherwise, he wouldn't be undertaking one of the most massive humanitarian efforts we have ever undertaken, in Iraq right now. I understand that you believe we cannot win the hearts and minds while at the same time killing ordinary ME citizens neighbors even if they are terrorists, but I suggest to you that we have no other choice. The terrorists represent a real and imminent danger to all the people of the world, and no responsible leader, Republican, Democrat, or otherwise, can expect the American people to accept a policy that says we wronged these people in the past, and now we must just continued to maintain a purely humanitarian and defensive posture and hope and pray that in the decades to come these peoples murderous hatred of us will subside. You and I both know that this is the stuff produced in fantasy land. So while I agree with alot of what you say in regards to winning the hearts and minds, I point out the fact that you have said nothing of how we should deal with the crisis of murderous networks of Jihadi's who are aiming each and every weapon they can get their hands on directly at us.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:11:57 PM EST
    Soccerdad and Dadler, I have enjoyed the debate, but I believe I have pushed Jeralyn about as far as she is going to be pushed today, so, I will have to continue correcting your misgivings another day..........but as a parting shot, consider this;
    The raid on Fallujah, the use of cluster munitions, napalm, white phospherous, large bombs in civilian neighborhoods, AG prison and other torture spots, the use of collective punishment, the lack of reconstruction, and use of "sweeps" , and a concerted effort to postpone elections all indicate a policy of occupation not liberation.
    While all these instances have a basis in truth, to use them together as a collective collage to represent the overall picture of this conflict, devoid of all the successful humanitarian and military operations we have undertaken, is nothing more than the pure propaganda that you accuse me of.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#42)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:45:21 PM EST
    Variable - sorry no. The lack of reconstruction effort has been well documented. Successful military operations - as defined by what? The success of any military operation in the context of fighting an insurgency must be evaluated not only in terms of dead bodies, captured weapons, etc but also by its effects on the political goals of which winning hearts and minds must be central. Dropping a 1000lb bomb on a house may have been a military success, i.e. the suspected terrorists may have been killed but it have have severely damaged the mission of winning hearts and minds if there were innocent women and children that were also killed. Here's the crux, it doesn't matter what central command thinks, it only matters, wrt to politcal aims, what the locals perceive. There has been good humanitarian work done by the soldiers but when taken as a whole it has not accomplished much that helps Iraqis on a daily basis e.g. security and electricity. This is clearly not the fault of the individual soldier but those who planned this fiasco. The civilian leadership at the Pentegon were told what was needed by military analysts and they ignored that advice. IMO Bush was never interested in strict liberation but in occupation and establishment of a US friendly government in order to further the geopolitical goals of the US in the area.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#43)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 01:35:55 PM EST
    Variable, To advocate violence to end terrorism is to advocate perpetual war. Just FYI. Want to end terrorism? Our corporate/political opportunists should stop interfering with the affairs of other nations. Shortly, any support for terrorist movements against us will evaporate. No money, no guns. Reduced to street corner wackos. Our foreign policy is a river of gold to these people. Oh yeah, and it would help if we stop killing people.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#44)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 01:57:54 PM EST
    Variable, Thanks to you, too. But I don't ignore the "good things", I simply don't agree that they outweigh the utter chaos we CHOSE WILLFULLY to inflict on that already battered nation. If it did outweigh it, I seriously doubt we'd be having this disagreement. Have a good one, my fellow free American.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#45)
    by Slado on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 02:46:07 PM EST
    Unfortunately this and other consequences (wounded soldiers, the killing of animals, destruction of porperty, billions of dollars spent) are all results of war. It's simple. The ends either justify the means or they don't. Think Nagasaki, Dresden, Berlin... Innocent civilians have died by the thousands during every conflict the USA has ever participated in. Can the individual case of a German family dying at the hands of Allied bombers be used to make the claim that the whole campaign against the Nazi's was tragic and unecessary? What about all the indians killed during the expansion of the west? What about all the civilians starved to death during the seiges of the Civil War. What about the Japanese families killed in an instant by fire bombing and the Abomb? What about the civilinans who were gased during WWI? What about the Indians who were forced to take sides during the French Indian wars? Etc... And before you start don't chime in with the "don't compare WWII to IRaq argument" I'm not. I'm only saying picking individual occurances out of thousands to make a case against or for (say a single election) a conflict doesn't work. In my opinion the overall War in Iraq is justified by the removal of Saddam Hussein and the establishment of a democracy in the Middle East. If you think war is never the answer then just say so. But don't cherry pick occurances to justify your predetermined point of view.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#46)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 04:01:10 PM EST
    Slado, you need to and try and understand the differences between WWII and a fight against insurgents/terrorists. I suggest to to to the Army War College web site and read up. You obviously have not get up to date

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#47)
    by Slado on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 05:56:15 AM EST
    Soccerdad You missed my broader point that to judge the whole conflict on a single incident never makes sense. Unless your opinion is predetermined and the incident is only fuel to futher cement your decision that Iraq is an unworthy cause. Fine that is your opinion but 2 to 3 years from now we'll know if it was worth the cost.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#48)
    by soccerdad on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 06:23:24 AM EST
    You missed my broader point that to judge the whole conflict on a single incident never makes sense
    Pretty poor weasel on your part. You obviously didn't bother to read all my comments above or more likely chose to ignore them to make your gratuitous attack. This kind of incident has been going on since the war began. In fact much worse has occurred.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 08:01:42 AM EST
    soccerdad.. you need to and try and understand the differences between WWII and a fight against insurgents/terrorists. There are plenty of differences... so what? What's your point? The fact of the matter is we are at war...and the tactics of war have changed over the last 50 years... agian I say....so what? You adapt or you die. You obviously didn't bother to read all my comments above or more likely chose to ignore them to make your gratuitous attack Nothing Slado said to you came close to an "attack". Get over yourself dude. You're the one that "didn't bother to read" all that was said before you chose to comment. This kind of incident has been going on since the war began. Yes...and that's exactly what Slado was trying to say... war is hell and these things happen. Do you comprehend what you read?

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#50)
    by soccerdad on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 08:41:39 AM EST
    More mindless blather from BB. You also dont understand the good discussion i was having with variable yesterday. Here's the crux. There is a major difference in the way you fight a war like WWII and a war of liberation involving battling local insurgents. We were discussing those differences and whether the tactics used by the US were consistent with a war of liberation or not. In a war of liberation in which a portion of the population are insurgents its important to consider the political fall out of every militry actions. Note: these are not my ideas but those of military planners at the Army war College. Continued "shock and awe" carried out in populated areas is inconsistent with a war of liberation but is consistent with a war of occupation, Like most wingers when you dont understand something you dismss it as unimportant or purposely act obtuse.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 09:16:57 AM EST
    soccerdad... Continued "shock and awe" carried out in populated areas is inconsistent with a war of liberation but is consistent with a war of occupation, So...bombing a house that insurgents ran into is "shock and awe" to you? If not, please define what you 'think' shock & awe is. Like most wingers when you dont understand something you dismss it as unimportant or purposely act obtuse. Yes..and like most moonbats when you don't get it your first reaction is to call the other guy names and attack his character.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#52)
    by Slado on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 10:19:57 AM EST
    Bombing terrorist hideouts does not make for war crimes. Directly targeting innocent civilians equals war crimes. Is that what the left is accusing the U.S. Military of doing? If so say it. Don't dance around the edges in order to make yourself feel good while you claim this war is unjustified. The Iraq War is worth the loss of life if in the end Iraq stands as a democracy. We'll see. I'm not going to falsely claim that it's justified now because it hasn't ended. Jury still out, 3rd quater etc... I think the invasion was justified to remove Saddam, even without WMD but that's me. I understand if you don't agree. But we're way past that argument. Now we are onto a better one. Is the War worht it and will we prevail. The end game or result is yet to be determined so it's premature to say the whole war is a mistake. To pick and choose your stories out of the war, however numerous, is disengenuous but that's you're right. Several wars fought by Americans when civilians and innocents were maimed and killed gave you the right to speak your mind.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#53)
    by soccerdad on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 10:24:10 AM EST
    BB - you obviously can't, or refuse to, follow the discussion and thread. Since you didn't understand it the first time whats the point of rehashing it again. There was no attack get over it dude

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#54)
    by soccerdad on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 10:37:46 AM EST
    Bombing terrorist hideouts does not make for war crimes.
    A consistent policy of ignoring civilian causlaties and using banned weapons that kill civilians is a war crime. I would posit that the bombing of this house was by itself not a war crime but extremely bad policy if you are trying to win hearts and minds. But since Bush isn't just bomb away. The US has committed a number of war crimes in this war. Thats just the way it is. I gave a partial list earlier.
    The Iraq War is worth the loss of life if in the end Iraq stands as a democracy.
    War has nothing to do with establishing a democracy, hell Bush doesn't care about democracy at home. The purpose of this war is simply to establish by any means possible a stable government willing to do "buisness" with the US. This has been US policy in the ME for the last 50 years at least independent of the party in the WH. Will we prevail? Depends on what you mean by prevailing? The next couple of months will tell the outcome pending negotiations to form a government. In any event Bush will not get the result he wanted, the best he can hope for is probably a fragmented Iraq and good relations with the Kurds.
    To pick and choose your stories out of the war, however numerous, is disengenuous
    This is pure nonsense, but you can put your head back in the sand thats your right. Many of my views are supported by military analysts who have examined whats gone wrong.
    Several wars fought by Americans when civilians and innocents were maimed and killed gave you the right to speak your mind.
    Mindless self-serving nonsense. "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#55)
    by Sailor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 11:01:09 AM EST
    So let's assume there were 3 insurgents planting a bomb, (which is quite a stretch considering the lack of evidence); what ratio of insurgents to innocent children do wingnuts consider acceptable? In this case they are championing 4 kids for 3 insurgents. Would they kill millions of children for 1 insurgent? We have established murdering innocents is OK with wingnuts, now we are just haggling over numbers.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#56)
    by roy on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 11:26:19 AM EST
    what ratio of insurgents to innocent children do wingnuts consider acceptable?
    I don't have a firm answer, but we should consider that many "insurgents" are also "terrorists" who attack Iraqi civilians. So if (just example numbers to clarify my point) each insurgent would kill one innocent child in the future, and we kill one innocent child in the process of killing each insurgent, then the innocent child body count is basically a wash. But that doesn't address the possibility of a way to save the children who would be killed by the insurgents, while killing fewer children ourselves. The tradeoffs of tactical changes are non-obvious and I'd get some vital aspect of it wrong if I tried.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 01:24:23 PM EST
    Charlie.... Gee, soc, doesn't our l'il bigot boy have a firm grasp of the obvious. I'm not a bigot any more than you are. Your hate for this country & it's fighting men is very obvious.. And BTW...try speaking english when commenting, not that it would make any more sense. Soccerdad... BB - you obviously can't, or refuse to, follow the discussion and thread. LOL..I know the thread is "misteps"... there is just a disagreement on what that means. As far as you're concerned everything is...right! Besides, you're the one that is out in left field here...as per your next comment: There was no attack get over it dude That's exactly what I was trying to tell you after you accused Slado of attacking you. A consistent policy of ignoring civilian causlaties Does not posting them on the evening news warrant "ignoring" them? You never did answer my 'shock & awe' question either. Have no answer do you? Or are you content with the news media's version. The US has committed a number of war crimes in this war. Says you! Killing civilians...which does happen in times of war... is not... let me repeat...is not a war crime! Sailor... We have established murdering innocents is OK with wingnuts, No we haven't. Civilains being killed in times of war is not .. as you put it... MURDER... to most Americans. I know that's hard for some of you when you think it's ok to abort (MURDER) babies... but try to deal with it if you can? You are probably on the band wagon to save convicted murderers from the death penalty too... See any hipocracy here at all???

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#58)
    by soccerdad on Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 01:53:51 PM EST
    Killing civilians...which does happen in times of war... is not... let me repeat...is not a war crime!
    patently false. Specifically targeting civilians is a war crime. Collective punishment of civilians is a war crime. the use of cluster munitions in a heavily populated area is a war crime. there are others but you dont care. Not only that its stupid policy if your goal was liberation, but its not. Besides thereonly Muslims right BB? BB and the other wingnuts are in the corner eyes closed, yelling "la la la la la" at the top of their lungs so that no new information gets in.

    Re: More Missteps in Iraq (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 11:37:08 AM EST
    soccerdad... Specifically targeting civilians is a war crime. Everytime I see one of you lefties post this BS my blood boils!!!! THE U.S. DOES NOT NOW OR EVER HAS PURPOSELY TARGETED CIVILIANS!!!! I know of quite a few military men (including me) that would love to take you to the woodshed for making sic comments like that. Where do you get off? How dare you even suggest that we do that... Do you have any idea how many men's lives are put in more jeapordy because we GO OUT OF OUR WAY to try and keep civilian casualties down???? You have no freakin clue. Try and educate yourself...talk to men that have been there and quit watching the CBS news!!! Collective punishment of civilians is a war crime. I'll give it right back to you...that comment is "patently false". Please eduscate me as to where that happened? the use of cluster munitions in a heavily populated area is a war crime. And please point that verse out on the "war crimes" book! BB and the other wingnuts are in the corner eyes closed, Yeah soccerdad..and you (and other moonbats like you) are in the corner with your eyes wide shut to anything that is negative about your country & it's military... If's it reported on the news..it must be true ,,, huh? BTW...those miners are dead... contrary to what the news said.